Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:MOSQUE-ON-WATER.jpg

Image:MOSQUE-ON-WATER.jpg - not featured edit

Info created, uploaded, and nominated by --Ilmarry 15:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ilmarry 15:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please add more info to the pictures summary. Especially the name of the mosque and the place where the mosque is should be found in the summary. --AngMoKio 15:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj 17:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Umnik 17:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice picture. Can you add a geocoding please? -- MJJR 19:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy, oversaturated, lightspots blured out, distorted. No way that this can be a FP. --Niabot 01:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Above critics are not appropriate. --B.navez 02:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose noise -- Gorgo 11:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it is very noisy and the light sources are significantly overexposed. --MichaelMaggs 17:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a very good composition with a for me very delicate lightning and colors. Refreshing to see contributions of new topics from regions we seldomly see material from. Sure, the lights are operexposed. But is it a problem? I don't think so. Sure, there is a little bit of noise, but this is hard to avoid at the time of day this photo was taken. Sure, it appears oversaturated. In this case I do not see it as problem. I think it is both beautiful, eyecatching and valuable. -- Slaunger 19:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but it's noisy. -- Laitche 08:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor quality. Lycaon 08:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow for me. --Beyond silence 20:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Vanrip 09:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning colors, gorgeous motif. --Johann Jaritz 05:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 7 support, 6 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 14:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MOSQUE-ON-WATER edit.jpg - not featured edit

Info noise reduced. -- Laitche 04:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice -- Gorgo 11:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, the light sources are significantly overexposed. --MichaelMaggs 17:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a good edit too. -- Slaunger 19:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose oversaturated, lightspots blured out, distorted. --Niabot 19:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support /Daniel78 00:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 3 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 14:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mosque on Water V2.jpg - not featured edit

Info taken 3 minutes later without the "overexposed light sources". -- Ilmarry 19:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support ..and it is also good without the light sources, although I prefer the editions with lights on. -- Slaunger 19:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose oversaturated, distorted. --Niabot 19:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful! --Calibas 08:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - A beautiful composition and colouring, I agree. But the photographic quality is not good enough. Alvesgaspar 09:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Much better without the numerous light sources. For me, the image colouring and subject overcome and quality issues. --Cpl Syx 03:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj 21:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit hesitant on the colors (do they really look like that?), but I like it. --Dori - Talk 22:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I used a cooling filter to emphasize the blue cast to create the intended "mood". The picture seems to be over-saturated because it was shot during the "GOLDEN HOUR". -- Ilmarry
Oppose No wow for me.

Sorry, you should try Commons:Quality images candidates first! --Beyond silence 23:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Quality still poor, sadly can't be saved. Lycaon 08:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful colors and good composition (needs more sharpening maybe?). Nasosi
Oppose as Alvesgaspar, sorry. --MichaelMaggs 07:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Vanrip 09:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have removed the votes of two users who I consider to have connections with the uploader/proposer. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice colors --Manco Capac 13:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 6 support, 5 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 14:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]